Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 03:27, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 04:39:34PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> > For PaX to be considered we need someone to maintain a kernel-patch-pax
> > package that contains a patch which applies to a Debian kernel source.
> > No-one has been willing to do this so far.
> Emm.. Excuse me? And what do the kernel-patch-adamantix packages do?
> Granted, it's not only PaX, but PaX+RSBAC+XFS+AES loop+LVS+other stuff, but
> still, it _does_ include PaX.
It includes PaX and heaps of other things which add up to a 569676 line patch,
compared to the 40823 line patch for the 2.4.22 kernel source package, or
44154 lines for 2.4.24.
If Herbert was to include all that in the Debian kernel source then he would
have to forward port it to 2.4.24 and then 2.4.25 when it comes out. From
previous discussions with Herbert I don't get the impression that he wants to
take on such tasks, he doesn't seem particularly enthusiastic about accepting
smaller patches such as the "acl" patch which is a mere 11026 lines.
Once a patch package which only contains PaX has been developed and once it
has been tested on many systems then it might even be considered for a
standard Debian kernel-source package.
For getting kernel packages made based on the kernel-patch-adamantix the best
thing to do would be to upload the .deb's yourself.
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page